“Churchill’s Choice” for Afghanistan
Posted on 06. Apr, 2010 by Jeff in Health and Medicine
AMERICA MUST SWALLOW ITS EGO; LET THE WISDOM PREVAIL
By General Mirza Aslam Beg
Afghanistan Ethnic Population
General McChrystal, having read Winston Churchill’s Memoirs, has opted for the new strategy for Afghanistan, named as ‘Churchill’s Choice’, defined in these words:
“The more an outside army sought to impose order, the more ferocious the Afghan response. Brute force of arms, was not only insufficient and ineffective, but likely to foment greater antagonism. Therefore, there was the option of pulling-out and working through and with the tribal system, and leaving the tribals to their blood letting.”
The new strategy, therefore was formalized during the Strategic Dialogue with Pakistan, with high expectations that the Pakistan Army, having ‘Steam-rolled’ the Taliban from North Waziristan, will be ready to support the surge against the Taliban, but on his return to Pakistan, General Kiyani has poured cold water on their hopes, by saying “Pakistan has no intention to launch ‘steam-roller operations’ in North Waziristan, nor it can provide any military support to the coalition forces surge inside Afghanistan.” So the hope for ‘brick-by-brick demolition of jehadi infrastructure’ is dashed to the ground, as much as the effort to capture Marjeh in the Helmand province, and the hoisting of the American flag on a mud-hut of Marjeh bazaar. The surge will now turn towards Kandahar, inviting a befitting response from the Taliban. This encounter, certainly, will not be a stalemate, as in Marjeh, but a turning point of the surge operations.
There certainly is no possibility of a quick-fix military success, to be presented to the nation before the mid-term elections, nor the option of “pulling-out and leaving the tribals, to their blood-letting”, by implementing the Maldives Plan. In fact the Maldives Plan would be the recipe for disaster. This option was used in 1990, after the Afghan Mujahideen and the government of Pakistan together provided the safe exit to the Soviet troops but for the exit of the occupation forces now, neither Pakistan nor Taliban can provide any such guarantee.
Obama’s dash to Kabul to announce the pre-mature success of the Strategic Dialogue, was a crude attempt to fool the American public, because the ‘surge strategy’ has failed and so has the Maldives Plan before it could be launched. What then is the option? The answer is “find peace with the Taliban of Afghanistan”, which is possible, if the occupation forces try to understand the genesis of Taliban of today and the way forward to negotiate peace with them. The Taliban of today are very much different from the Taliban of 1988-89. The Taliban of today are what the CIA website, ‘The Long War Journal’ describes in detail. Add to it the ‘hard core of young Taliban’, born during the last thirty years, under the shadows of war, who know nothing but to fight, for their freedom. They have seen no pleasures of life – la courtesy foreign invasions, by the Soviets and the Americans. They live in a state of anomie, where life and death have little meaning for them. Two super powers and the pride of Europe, the NATO forces stand humbled by them. They are a phenomenon, least understood, yet one can understand them, if there is the willingness to engage with them.
How to engage with them is the real problem. Because of the obsessions to call them “terrorists”, there is a hesitance to talk to them. One has to get rid of this obsession and treat them as ‘freedom fighters’, who, during the last three decades have sacrificed their two generations in order to “preserve their freedom, their values and traditions, which do not find harmony with the American plans and policies for Afghanistan.” Mulla Umar
There exists a serious trust deficit between the Taliban and USA, who betrayed them in 1989 at Geneva and again in 2001 at Bonn, by denying them power-sharing which they deserved as the winner and also being the majority, i.e. 55% of the population. The Maldives Plans which has now been hatched and is to be implemented, will be another betrayal and a disaster for peace.
Pakistan and the other stake-holders do not want a Talibanised Afghanistan. They have no right under any law to make such a demand. It is, for the people of Afghanistan to choose the form of government best suits them. Amongst our immediate neighbours, China follows the Communist/Socialist ideology and is the most peaceful country in the world. Iran follows the Islamic Ideology and despite such provocations from Israel and pressures from USA, has maintained its cool. Similarly, Afghanistan under the Taliban will follow the Islamic ideology, respecting the rule of law and distributive justice. In fact, the world has to remain engaged with them to ameliorate their sufferings of the last thirty years, caused by foreign aggressions. Pakistan and the USA, in particular therefore have “to recalibrate their positions and harmonize their interests with Afghanistan for a lasting peace in the region.”
It is not Karzai and his government, which will look after the American interests when they are gone from Afghanistan. The Taliban can provide such a guarantee, if we remain engaged with them to create mutual confidence and the promise to invest in rebuilding the country which has suffered untold misery, death, destruction and deprivation, at the hands of the two great powers – Russia and America. They owe to the people of Afghanistan, not in blood, or flesh, any more, but in kind, if they decide to save the day and abandon the Churchill’s Choice of “leaving the tribes, to their blood letting.
______________________________________________________________________
General Mirza Aslam Beg is the former Chief of Army Staff, Pakistan. After retirement, he established his Think Tank,
General Beg
‘FRIENDS’ at Rawalpindi. He holds independent views that are widely respected and given serious thought. He contributes his articles regularly to opinion-maker.org
loading...
8 Responses to ““Churchill’s Choice” for Afghanistan”
Leave a Reply
Donations
Join Us
 |
| Subscribe to Opinion Maker |
| Email: |
Raja Mujtaba
08. Apr, 2010
Good coverage of the events.
?Churchill?s Choice? for Afghanistan « Therearenosunglasses’s Weblog
09. Apr, 2010
[...] ?Churchill?s Choice? for Afghanistan 9 04 2010 ?Churchill?s Choice? for Afghanistan [...]
The Devil in Indo-US Afghan Policy | Opinion Maker
14. Apr, 2010
[...] way is purely a US-NATO political-military illusion. General Aslam Beg, in his recent article ?Churchill?s Choice for Afghanistan? published in Opinion Maker has correctly pointed out that the contemporary ?Afghan Taliban? [...]
Khalil Nouri
16. Apr, 2010
General Sahib,
I am humbled by your article.
But you never mentioned if the Taliban can advocate for women?s rights, education and integration of Islamic schools as Turkey?s reformation currently being modeled.
In addition, respect of Shias, Hindus and other religions and not showing cockiness for their version of Islamic values and supremacy–since Allah has created us all equal.
Also a reconciliation and call for forgiveness as what they did to other minorities during their reign akin to Hazaras, Uzbeks and Tajiks and vice-versa.
As an Afghan Pashtun, I will be the first one to call upon the world that we are ready to embrace each other.
But I see vagueness in their approach as well as deep down mistrust between the regional powers that causes the Indo-Pakistani proxy wars and involvements in Afghanistan?s internal affairs.
I understand that Pakistan has an interest in Afghanistan and so should Afghanistan in Pakistan.
Pakistan?s Panjabi dominant government has never integrated Pashtuns and considers them as second class citizens.
I think you have laid out the foundation but there should be more to add and fix.
Hope to see your reply sir.
Thank you,
Khalil Nouri
Yasmeen Ali
18. Apr, 2010
On the US-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue based on USAs proposed departure from Afghanistan,following is my two pence:
1-Pakistan presented a 56 page “wish list” to USA including everything from civilian nuclear deal to help uplift education,alleviate poverty,to a quick fix to electricity issue,so on & so forth. By so doing,we have successfully lost the initiative and diluted the points that should have been hughlighted.
2-Pakistan will be given the role of the “Cleaning Boy” of USA in Afghanistan..The question is not of the role bit at what cost do we accept the role?
3-My guess is :peanuts.
Like always.
Yasmeen Ali
Shahid Ilyas Khan
23. Apr, 2010
I want to say many things, but here I would like to draw people’s attention to a big game that the Pakistani Taliban-sympathisers – including Mr. Beg – would like the public take for reality. Churchil’s people in the 19th century and the Soviets in the recent past ivaded Afghanistan and occupied it indeed, pursuant to their imperialist ambitions. Those invasions and occupations cannot at all be compared with the the presence in Afghanistan of the current UN mandated international security forces which are in Afghanistan to rebuild that war-torn country and free it from the scourge of religious extremism and terrorism. The current forces – as opposed to the 19th century british forces and the 1980s Soviet forces – have a broad-based public support in Afghanistan. These international forces operate in Afghanistan on the invitation of the Afghan government and parliament. Taliban are just a few thousand misguided men. It is not fair to advocate their imposition over tens of millions of Afghans.
Muhammad Dawood Khan
12. May, 2010
SALAM Beg: SAAB
I HOPE LIFE WILL TREAT U WELL…..
A VERY GOOD EFFORET ………I THINK U R LIKE A GIS DATA SPECIALIST.
arfzvinnvt
11. Jul, 2010
ZfCsWg tesetykykvre, [url=http://duoczgwzqkor.com/]duoczgwzqkor[/url], [link=http://vkcplvnlzzji.com/]vkcplvnlzzji[/link], http://yxwwnkdjboig.com/